[andoando]

I heard of this. My immediate criticism, is that even those with diagnosed ADHD aren't just deficient in focus/attention and impulsive in all aspects of their lives. They can drive a car, play video games, read subjects they are interested in, have long conversations, etc. That is to say, focus/attention/arousal are rather complex phenomenons that vary greatly based on circumstances, and aren't simple numbers we can say one is deficient in.

Testing someone in a completely artificial environment (sitting in an office during a diagnosis playing some tasks clicking on a computer screen) is hard for me to believe is exactly an accurate metric for revealing any of these things. Most especially, when a lot of people are actively seeking this diagnosis, and are motivated to alter their behavior to get the result they are looking for.

Im really curious how this company decided these tests are accurate at all. I assume they did some studies to find some variability in the test results and those who were already diagnosed and then determined those variability were indicative of ADHD. So what test is really doing IMO is just reinforcing the standard diagnostic criteria.

[vector_spaces]

People with ADHD actually have an increased risk of motorvehicle accidents, and don't perform as well in certain kinds of games compared to people who don't have ADHD (when you account for experience playing video games etc). The TOVA test is essentially a simple video game -- it's a computerized test that checks reaction times to a targeted stimulus that appears on a computer screen. There are different classes of error that correspond to different kinds of executive dysfunction

You are right that attention is a complex phenomenon, but keep in mind that people who evaluate ADHD are aware of the limitations -- that is why TOVA isn't typically the only mechanism used for diagnosis. ADHD evaluation often involves multiple sessions in which other possible explanations are ruled out or explored, along with questionnaires from friends and family who know the person -- incidentally some of the questions on the ones I collected from my friends/family were about my driving!

Even with this, there are still limitations, but there's no need to throw the baby out with the bathwater -- the goal is to produce an actionable explanation that we can use to reduce suffering, and for many people this explanation does exactly that.

[andoando]

>Even with this, there are still limitations, but there's no need to throw the baby out with the bathwater -- the goal is to produce an actionable explanation that we can use to reduce suffering, and for many people this explanation does exactly that.

So did shamens, tarot readers, and psychics. The "actionable" part of all this is prescribing stimulants. Why can't we just focus on prescribing stimulants to those who would benefit from stimulants? Is the "ADHD" part of it really necessary?

[vector_spaces]

The actionable part includes stimulants, but also self-awareness and structure. Stimulants alone won't usually lead to the kinds of changes that improve quality of life. Virtually any clinician and expert on this topic agrees with this point

I don't understand your question about whether or not the "ADHD" part is necessary. Yes, we should have words for complex ideas.

The comparison to shamans and tarot readers comes off as dismissive and uninformed, and generally in poor taste. Ultimately you are questioning a diagnostic framework that you don't understand very well given your other comments. There are critiques to be made and even aspects of your position that I agree with but you really need to understand the framework you intend to tear down before tearing it down

[andoando]

My point is giving people any explanation for their problems - so long as its backed by authority helps them - it says nothing to the truthfulness of those explanations.

Anyway youre being really dismissive too instead of just responding to my points. If you think Im being dumb fine Im just not interested in an emotionally heated argument.

I apologize if I seem dismissive of people's mental health - not my intention Ive been dealing with them my whole life. Take care.

[andoando]

>People with ADHD actually have an increased risk of motorvehicle accidents,

Does this mean that you identified a definite cause, or does this mean as part of an ADHD diagnosis, you managed to capture a group of individuals with specific traits like being more impulsive, taking higher risks, etc?

I can for example, make up 9 seemingly related symptoms, and given a large enough population millions of people will fit it. Then I assure you I can do a wide range of studies that will find that my group of people will deviate from the norm in X,Y,Z.

Also weirdly enough, I noticed I make a lot more mistakes while driving while on adderall.

[vector_spaces]

I'm not sure what your point is -- but you might look into Chesterton's fence. It's a metaphor that illustrates a common trap that lots of smart people fall into.

[andoando]

Is this like the sophisticated version of negging? I think itd have been easier to just give me few worss to look into.

I bought into the whole "I have Adhd thing thats why Im failing at school" thing 13 years ago and have since then spent countless hours thinking and talking about it.

Im glad it helps people, but unless someone can prove definitive facts about my brain, I have all the answers I need as to why I am who I am or why I do what I do. And yes stimulants help sometimes when Im forced to do shit I have zero interest in for prolonged periods of time, simple as that